Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset, was, on the 7th of February, 1547, constituted earl marshal of England for life; but being deprived of the office in the 5th year of Edward VI. John Dudley, Earl of Warwick, was, on the 20th of April, 1551, appointed earl marshal of England, and, on the 11th of October following, advanced to the dignity of Duke of Northumberland; but was beheaded on the 22nd of August following, being convicted of high

treason.

Thomas Howard, eldest sou of the before-mentioned Henry, Earl of Surrey, who was beheaded during the reign of Henry VIII. was, in the first year of Queen Mary's reign, fully restored in blood, the act for the attainder of the duke, his grandfather, being then made void, and he became earl marshal of England. In 1572, this Duke of Norfolk was attainted for high treason, and on the 2nd of June, in that year, beheaded on Tower Hill; whereupon, George Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, was constituted earl marshal of England.

After the death of the Earl of Shrewsbury, which took place on the 18th of November, 1590, the office of earl marshal of England continued vacant till the year 1592, when it was put in commission to William Lord Burleigh, lord high treasurer; Charles, Lord Howard of Effingham, lord high admiral; and Henry, Lord Hunsdon, lord chamberlain of the household; who continued to execute the office until the 28th December, 1597, when Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, was advanced to the office of earl marshal of England. In the 41st of Elizabeth, he was suspended from that office, and all the other employments he held under the crown; and shortly after was beheaded; whereupon, the queen granted a commission to Thomas, Lord Buckhurst; Charles, Earl of Nottingham, lord high admiral; and Edward, Earl of Worcester, master of the horse, for the execution of the office of earl marshal of England; which office they retained till the queen's death. Upon the accession of James to the throne, Edward, Earl of Worcester, was constituted earl marshal of England, for the day of his coronation; which being over, the king appointed Lodowick, Duke of Lenox, and the Earls of Dorset, Nottingham, Suffolk, Devonshire, and Northampton, to be joint commissioners with the Earl of Worcester, for executing the office.

In the beginning of the year 1621, the office of earl marshal of England was again commissioned to Edward, Earl of Worcester, then lord privy seal; Lodowick, Duke of Lenox, lord steward of the household; George, Marquess of Buckingham, lord high admiral: and Thomas, Earl of Arundel and Surrey; but they executed it but a very short time: for Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, was, on the 29th of August following, constituted earl marshal of England for life. He was also advanced to the title of Earl of Norfolk, by letters patent, in the 20th year of Charles I.; but died on the 4th of October, 1646.

James Howard, Earl of Suffolk, executed the office of earl marshal of England, at the coronation of Charles II. Henry Howard, Baron Howard of Castle Rising, and Earl of Norwich, was, by letters patent, dated 19th of October, 1672, constituted hereditary earl marshal of England, with limitation, in default of issue male, to the heirs male of his grandfather, the last-mentioned Thomas, Earl of Arundel, &c. with remainder to the late Earl of Suffolk and his heirs male, remainder to Charles Howard, Earl of Nottingham, and his heirs male. On the death of his elder

brother Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, Earl of Arundel, Surrey, &c. which happened in the year 1677, he succeeded to the dukedom and all the other honours and estates; and died on the 11th of January, 1683. He had issue two sons; first, Henry Howard, who on the 27th of January, 1683, was summoned to parliament as Barou Mowbray; secondly, Thomas Howard, lord of the manor of Worksop, in the county of Nottingham; and also three daughters.

Henry Howard, Baron Mowbray, succeeded his father as Duke of Norfolk, and hereditary earl marshal of England. He died on the 2nd of April, 1701, without issue; and was succeeded by Thomas Howard, eldest son of the before-mentioned Thomas Howard, lord of the manor of Worksop, as Duke of Norfolk, &c. and as hereditary earl marshal of England. He died without issue, on the 23rd of December, 1732; when Edward Howard, third son of Thomas Howard, lord of the manor of Worksop, succeeded bim as Duke of Norfolk, &c. and hereditary earl marshal of England. This duke also dying without issue, on the 20th of September, 1777, was succeeded by Charles Howard, tenth Duke of Norfolk, and hereditary earl marshal of England, grandson of Charles, son of Heury-Frederick, Earl of Arundel, in the reign of Charles I. His grace, dying in 1786, was succeeded by his only son, Charles Howard, eleventh Duke of Norfolk, and hereditary earl marshal of England; who, dying without issue in December, 1815, was succeeded by Bernard Edward Howard, Esq. (descended from Bernard Howard, Esq. brother of Thomas and Henry, fifth and sixth Dukes of Norfolk, and Charles Howard, the great grandfather of the last Duke) who is now 12th Duke of Norfolk, &c. and hereditary earl marshal of England, 1828.

The constable and marshal, for the better and more effectual discharge of their respective military and ceremonial functions, had under them certain ministers, distinguished by the general title of heralds, and who executed the commands of the sovereign, and of these two great officers.

There have been a great variety of statements and opinions concerning the origin and institution of this office; there is no doubt, however, that it is of great antiquity; as, according to the generality of the most approved writers, the word herald signifies a messenger of war and peace, in some respects such as the feciales of the Romans were. Sir John Ferne traces the origin of this office as such, to the reign of Priam, King of Troy; others trace it to Scripture History, and deduce the instance, related in Daniel iii. 4, of a herald proclaiming the king's will and pleasure. But, passing over these statements, and also those concerning the history of the kerukes among the Greeks, and the feciales among the Romans, we will take a more modern view of their origin, and connexion with their present functions.

Among the different nations of Europe, by whom heralds have been employed, many have claimed the honour of their primary institution. That they have been generally adopted in imitation of each other, we may suppose from the apparent similarity in the title; which, in French, is herault, heraut, and heraud; in Italian, araldo; in Spanish, heraldo, or farante; in Danish, herold; in Dutch, heraut; in German, heerolde; and in barbarous Latin, heraldus, heraltns, heroldus, haraldus, herodes, heroaldus, &c. In attempting to give the etymology of this word, authors have searched several of these languages; in some of which they have supposed they have found the root; whilst others

have compounded it of two words; as Verstegan, who says it is derived from here, an army, and healt, a champion, as the army's champion, whose especial charge was to challenge to battle or combat. There are many authors, who give it as their opinion, that this word is of German or Teutonic extraction, and that it is derived from the word here; but that word having a multiplicity of significations attached to it in the German language, we find it differently interpreted; some writers informing us, that it imports, not only the army itself, but arms also, and likewise a lord or master. Thus we find some interpret it, by supposing it to be written here, lord; and alt, old; which also agrees with Upton's definition, who says they were veterani, old soldiers of fame. Again, it is given as the opinion of a judicious writer, that it may be derived from the German word here, an army, and the old Teutonic word halden, halten, or holden; in Saxon, healden or gehealden; in Islandic, halda; which signifies to hold any office, charge, or employment. To ascertain the precise time when these officers were first instituted, it will be necessary to take a view of the several duties assigned to them, and more particularly of the purposes for which they seem to have been originally established.

We learn from Bertrand Caprioli and others, that, auciently it was customary for the emperors to take under their immediate care and protection, such of their best, most experienced, and valiant soldiers of gentilitial birth, that had been wounded or maimed in the wars, and to maintain them; that these were distinguished by the appellation of veterani or veterans; that they were had in great esteem; and that the undertaking and prosecution of sieges and engagements, and the conduct of all other military affairs, were carried on by their advice, and under their direction. On this account, their services became necessary; and they were further employed by the emperors to carry messages, and negociate or settle disputes with hostile parties. Acting in this character with secrecy and honour, they established their reputation, and were generally received and dismissed by kings and princes with safety, civility, and esteem. The institution of tournaments and justs opened a new field for the employment of the veterans; for it became their business to regulate and conduct those exercises; which they were well enabled to do, not only from their military skill, but, being themselves of noble blood, they were generally acquainted with the families of the nobility and gentry, and were therefore better capable to judge whether the applicants were admissable within the lists. About the same time, armories became common, and were borne as gentilitial marks of distinction, on the banners, surcoats, and shields of the noble and knightly; they were hung up at the entrance of the lists as a criterion of the gentility of the owner; and, before they were permitted to tournay, a certificate thereof from the veterans being necessary, they wre obliged to make themselves acquainted with the devices a family had assumed, and to prevent the confusion which might arise from bearing them improperly. The same officers were found very useful during the crusades, being employed in keeping up a constant intercourse between the different armies. It is probable, that the benefit of assuming some badge of distinction, which should so evidence itself, that they might be known at sight, and thus be protected, conducted safe through the different armies, admitted to audience, and credited; and as each prince had then his peculiar symbol and armorial ensign, what

could be more obvious than the investing the messenger with the like coat of arms as his prince bore, which would effectually answer all the above-mentioned purposes. Being thus empowered, they would become particularly acquainted with the ensigns throughout the host. It is also probable, that they would then be styled heralds; though how this term came to be used, cannot now be discovered. Certain it is, that soon after this time, the word heraldus occurs in the imperial constitutions of Frederick Enobarbus, and that they provided for the safe passports and inviolable security of such officers. After their return from the expeditions to the Holy Land, the benefits arising from such attendants would be so evident to the princes, that they would retain this manner of intercourse, and extend their employments. It would be difficult to fix the precise time, in which the office of heralds, under that, or any other appellation, was first introduced into England; as little or no information is furnished by our ancient historians, concerning that subject. The oldest public muniments, which have been discovered, wherein English heralds are mentioned, are some made in the reign of Edward III.; and yet that they were previously established is satisfactorily proved. Sir Henry Spelman favours us with an acquittance, given by Peter to John de Herberia, which was dated in the 4th year of Edward I. viz. Rex Hyraudorum citra aquam de Trent ex parte Boreale. And they are again mentioned in a statute, called the statute of arms, which was made in the same reign, and ordains that no king of heralds, nor those that are subordinate to him, shall wear any armour, except a sword without point; and that kings of heralds should have only their houces des armes, i. e. their tabards. From these proofs, we gather, not only that England had then its heralds, but that they were, even then, divided into classes. Some authors have supposed, that the Saxon monarchs and their nobility had their heralds; but this conjecture is generally rejected as unfounded. The Normans, at the time of their invasion of this country, seem not to have had that office then introduced among them, as neither William nor his two sons made use of such officers. Probability favours the reign of Henry II.; as that prince, through his intercourse with France, Germany, &c. where those officers had been established for a length of time, must have been acquainted with their establishment, services, and importance; so that we may suppose they were then first introduced here, and thenceforward arrived at that state and condition, in which we find them in the reign of Edward I.

Being, from the time of their first introduction into this kingdom, the immediate and subordinate ministers of the marshal and constable, they assisted in the management and conduct of the several branches of duty within the department of these two great officers. Hence it was, that they had the cognizance, inspection, marshalling, and regulation of coat armour, and the several marks of distinction relative to it; that they received all foreign nobility and others coming to England, to exercise at tournaments, and gave safe conduct to such, from the time of their arrival till their departure; that they assisted at all military feats; and that they had a very considerable charge and interference in the order and progress of legal combat. It was also from the same source that they derived the employment of marshalling and conducting coronations, marriages, baptisms, funerals, interviews, and those other august assemblies, processious, pomps, and solemnities, wherein the splendour and magnificence of our ancient monarchs principally consisted.

York herald was instituted, as some say, by Edward III. in honour of his son, whom he created Duke of York; but several manuscripts expressly attribute that institution to Edward IV. Sufficient authority has not been produced for either of these assertions; and the earliest record in which this officer is mentioned, is a patent roll of the 1st year of Richard III. granting to John Water, York herald of arms, the manor of Bayhall, &c.

Richmond herald occurs in the reign of Edward IV.; in the 12th year of which, that officer was made Gwyenne king of arms.

The succession of these titles down to the present time, has been uninterrupted. Besides these, there have been numerous other heralds, who have belonged to sovereigns, princes, and nobles, whose titles were taken from territories within the realm, foreign dominions belonging to the crown, places where signal victories have been obtained, the badges of the sovereign, the titles of their lords, &c.; but as it is long since they became extinct, it is not necessary to give a list of them here.

The privileges even of the higher nobility did not, however, extend so far as to allow a nobleman personally to create, at his own will, and for his own use, a herald of arms; but when any nobleman was desirous of having a herald of his own, he was obliged to present the person whom he had chosen to his sovereign, who, consenting thereto, either personally, or by some one authorized so to do, created the person nominated a herald, in presence of the officer of arms of the crown. This ceremony being, in all respects, the same as that observed in creating the king's heralds, excepting the necessary variation of certain clauses in their oath, and their investiture with the tabard or coat of arms of their particular lord. These heralds had, thereupon, an annuity, or a sufficient maintenance, settled upon them for life.

Next in succession, and lowest in degree, follow the PURSUIVANTS OF ARMS. These were, as their name imports, which is most probably of French extraction, followers, marshals, or messengers, attendant upon the herald. As the nobility possessed heralds, so they did pursuivants, who were created by them, with great ceremony, in the following manner. One of the heralds, wearing his master's coat, leading the person to be created a pursuivant by the left hand, and holding a cupful of wine and water in his right, came into the presence of the lord and master of him who was to be created, and of whom the herald asked by what name he would have his pursuivant called; which the lord having mentioned, the herald poured part of the wine and water on his head, calling him by the name so assigned to him. The herald then took the coat of his lord, and put it over his head athwart, so that part of the coat made for his arms hung before and behind, and the longer part of it on both sides of the persons created; and in which way the pursuivant was always to wear it. This done, an oath of fidelity was administered to him, and the ceremony concluded. The appointment of heralds and pursuivants of arms by the nobility has long been discontinued, and there are now only four pursuivants belonging to the college of arms: viz.

Rouge Croix, which is the most ancient title of a pursuivant, and, doubtless, was taken from the red cross of St. George. He was instituted by Henry V. from which time it was regularly continued until April, 1644; after which

Blue Mantle: this officer is said to have been instituted by Henry V.; but, according to others, by Edward III. by whom he was so called, in allusion to the French coat being blue, which that monarch had assumed. The only vacancy which has occurred in the succession of this officer, was between the years 1646 and 1660.

Rouge Dragon, who was instituted by Henry VII. on the day preceding his coronation, and was so styled from the ensign of Cadwallader, from whom that king derived himself in a male line; or, according to others, from the red dragon, one of the supporters of that monarch's arms; which supporter, it is again observed, was itself assumed from Cadwallader's ensign. And

Portcullis, who was likewise instituted by Henry VII. and so named from that badge or cognizance used by him. The succession of the two last-mentioned offices has not been interrupted since their institution.

The pursuivant is a noviciate, or in a state of probation for future promotion. Anciently, the term of noviciature was seven years, after the expiration of which the pursuivant was eligible to the office of herald; and this institution was then so particularly attended to, that the sovereign was allowed to dispense with one year only, and that but on extraordinary occasions. In this kingdom, however, there was probably some relaxation long ago; as we find the heralds petitioned for the restoration of this ancient qualification; but, since that time, it has been determined by a judgement in Westminster Hall, that a person may lawfully be made, directly, per saltum, a herald, without ever being a pursuivant.

The tabards of the kings of arms are velvet, with the royal arms richly embroidered, over which they wear the collar of SS. with two portcullises of silver gilt; the crown with which they are crowned is a circle of gold, inscribed with part of the first verse of the 51st Psalm, Miserere mei, Deus, secundum magnum misericordiam tuam, and is surmounted with sixteen upright leaves, shaped like those of the oak; (it was formerly ornamented with fleurons, and resembled the coronets of the present dukes) within the crown is a cap of crimson scarlet, doubled with ermine, having at the top a large tuft, or tassel, wrought in gold silk. See Pl. 29, fig. 7. Anciently, they wore their crowns at the four high feasts of the year, Christmas, Easter, Whitsuntide, and All Saints' day, when their attendance was required near the person of their sovereign; but of late, they have only worn them at coronations. They also each wear, at a gold chain or riband, the escutcheon, or badge, of their office, by which they are distinguished.

The badge of Garter principal king of arms, is the arms of that order; viz. St. George's cross, impaling the royal arms within the Garter, under the imperial crown of Great Britain: the same on both sides. The arms of his office are, argent, St. George's cross; on a chief azure, (not gules, as given by the Rev. M. Noble and others, who have copied the error from Edmondson) a coronet within a garter of the order, between a lion of England and a fleur-de-lis, or. See Pl. 30, fig. 25.*

The badge of Clarencieux king of arms, is, on an escutcheon, crowned with a crown of the king of arms, on a

office of Garter king of arms; G. Harrison, Esq. that of Clarencieux; *This Plate was engraven, when Sir Isaac Heard, Knt. held the